monkeychunks wrote:TechnoProdigy wrote:Last I checked, permanent meant permanent. I guess it's just another term to throw around without really meaning it, like 'literally'.
Permanent usually means permanent. However Intelli had mercy on him, and saw he probly wouldn't do it again. I don't see why you guys are complaining.
I don't have any problem with PotatoNinja himself, but the problem is that this undermines the idea of having a troublemaker irrevocably removed from the community. Yes, "permanent usually means permanent," but since it apparently doesn't
always mean permanent, the term has essentially lost its meaning.
Other "permabanned" players could start looking for exceptions. If other appeals for such bans are filed, there would have to be a whole process of considering the appeal, because "no, you've been permabanned before" is no longer a very sincere reason to reject an appeal. I'm not suggesting that potatoninja's unbanning implies that lightbulbs and anarchaos will be unbanned... but it now seems at least theoretically possible.
Frankly, the staff ought to stop marking appeals as perma'd at this point. Obviously some offenses for rejected appeals are worse than others, so the staff member responding to appeals could go ahead and suggest that future appeals are
unlikely to be accepted, but they've now thrown out the ability to claim that an appeal will
never be accepted. Alternatively, perhaps we could start referring to those cases as "super-ultra-max-permabanned"... at least until a super-ultra-max-permabanned player is unbanned for the first time.
The Greymarch has ended.
